[ SECRET POST #5446 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5446 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________














10. [SPOILERS for Wheel of Time]



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #779.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

LOTR was a huge gamble. Studios don't take those risks anymore, and if they do it's with big stars to draw viewers. I think that's more the joke.

[(Anonymous)]

If audiences went to those sort of movies, studios would make them. They don't though. The Last Duel proved that. I'm not blaming teh kids with their smart phones, just saying that general audiences are even more conservative right now than even the studios. If the Last Duel had been a success, then Hollywood would be rushing through a huge slate of pseudohistorical sword and sorcery movies even as we speak.

[(Anonymous)]

The Last Duel is only one movie, and one that was poorly marketed at that. Treating its box office failure as (1) a failure on the part of audiences and (2) proof that all gambles taken by studios will fail because audiences don't want new ideas is ridiculous.

[(Anonymous)]

Welcome to studio logic.

Okay, how about the RDJ Doctor Dolittle movie? That was hugely advertised and had a bankable actor in it and still tanked. That is two.

[(Anonymous)]

The remake with toilet humor? Can't imagine how that tanked.

[(Anonymous)]

Welcome to studio logic.

I agree that studio logic is bad. I don't think it's audiences' fault.

[(Anonymous)]

How was Doctor Doolittle a gamble? They spent a fortune on it, and it was an established IP.

I guess the gamble was that it would buck the trend of the OG Doctor Doolittle and actually make money?

[(Anonymous)]

That looked like a kids' movie and kind of lame, to boot.

Things can tank because they seem lame, you know.

[(Anonymous)]

SA, and I meant to add that the Eddie Murphy Dr Doolittle came out 20 years ago. Adults now saw that one and didn't feel the burning urge for another. They probably have the dvd and their kids have seen it there or on streaming.

Nobody was clamoring for more Dr fucking doolittle.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm pretty sure there's isn't any sorcery in The Last Duel. It's a historical drama, not fantasy.

It's hard to compare box office during a pandemic with box office before it, but TLD didn't do that well streaming either, did it?

If you want to talk about a massive risk by taking on an epic fantasy with a huge budget and not a lot of really big name stars (well-respected actors but not huge celebrities, and also some unknowns) that paid off ridiculously well at least for a while, Game of Thrones is right there.

[(Anonymous)]

The Last Duel is a historical drama, not a fantasy. Also if we're talking recent films, The Green Knight wasn't a blockbuster-sized success (not that much is, right now) but it did very well for an indie movie.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not sure why you think a dour piece of historical fiction about dudes reacting to a woman's rape would inspire a slate of sword and sorcery movies. Or that people not wanting to go to see the dour rape movie during a pandemic means people don't want fantasy. Because neither of these things are true.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think Dune is that different from LOTR in terms of being a gamble. The cast is well known, sure, but none of them are big box-office draws. And Dune's budget was actually higher than Fellowship's even after adjusting for inflation. Admittedly Villeneuve is more of a big-ticket name as a director than Jackson was at the time, but still.

You could also look at something like the WOT series - it's a TV show and on streaming, but they're spending a shitload of money on it and there's no major stars at all.

[(Anonymous)]

Big difference here - most of Dune is green screen whereas LOTR is location work.

[(Anonymous)]

We will likely never see that sort of location work happen ever again, not with the rise of whatever sorcery it is Lucasfilm is pioneering.

[(Anonymous)]

True, and that's a damn shame.

[tabaqui]

A lot of LotR was green-screen, too, just location green screen (ie: shot in a warehouse in New Zealand somewhere). Watch the endlessly fun extras, you'll see it.

[(Anonymous)]

Dune used a LOT of location work though. They filmed in Jordan and United Arab Emirates for Arrakis and Norway for Caladan.

https://collider.com/where-was-dune-filmed/

[(Anonymous)]

+1

And they took that risk knowing there were a lot of uphill factors in play that LOTR didn't have to contend with: biggest one being how much more difficult it is to put butts in seats at theaters during COVID.

[(Anonymous)]

Actually I don't think Dune is as big a gamble as you think. GoT proved there was taste for epics (but Dune actually had a damn ending), plus it's a famous cult classic and a reboot of a film to boot.

LOTR had no precursors.

[(Anonymous)]

LOTR is also a cult classic, and the previous Dune adaptation was a flop

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Oh yeah, I'm not saying LOTR wasn't a huge breakthrough. It was. But as cult classics go, I think LOTR was much widely more read and beloved than Dune before any of those movies were made. And it had film adaptations before, just animated ones. It was far from an unknown property, and a lot of people had been hoping for a good live-action movie for decades. It was either going to be a disaster or it was going to hit BIG, no middle ground possible.

David Lynch's version of Dune bombed. It lost a shitload of money. (Unfairly, I think - there's a lot of weird choices there but it isn't that bad.) Taking another chance on it from a different director is still a leap of faith.

[(Anonymous)]

Uhhh. I really have to disagree with your comparison of LOTR and the new Dune. I think we forget what a huge gamble LOTR was because it turned out to be wildly successful.

Besides Ian Mckellan, the LOTR cast were basically nobodies. LOTR had Magneto but then it had an old Dracula, the kid from the Goonies, and Mr Smith in a bit part. Dune is packed with the leads from such small films as Stars Wars, Spiderman, Guardians of the Galaxy, Aquaman, Avengers, etc. Reading the cast list of Dune is reading a who's who's of Hollywood A-listers.

And Villeneuve is not just a bigger ticket name than Jackson. Jackson was a nobody. He was best known for some c-list horror films and an adult themed muppet knock off.

The only gamble they have in common is that, while both IPs are extremely well known, that is not always a guarantee of a hit with audiences.

I do agree with you on Wheel of Time. It's clearly aiming to be Game of Thrones and is willing to burn dumpster trucks of money to try.

DA

[(Anonymous)]

I’m not disagreeing with you, but Cate Blanchett was already a big name before she was cast in LOTR, so it wasn’t just Ian McKellan. And even though Liv Tyler wasn’t a big name in the acting world yet, she was still the daughter of a famous rockstar.

[(Anonymous)]

I can honestly say I have never wanted to watch a movie purely because some famous actor is in it. Whether it's a famous actor or a complete new face it won't make a bad movie any better.